Comments by "Morgan King" (@MorganKing95) on "Top 10 Greatest Novels of All Time" video.

  1. Oh, I see. You’re one of those who were forced to read it during high school. Well, I was also one of them and also didn’t enjoy the novel back then, but I read it twice after I finished high school (one of those times was quite recently, actually) and it’s now one of my favorites. I would have given it a second chance now if I were you since it’s easier to enjoy a book or movie when you’re not forced to read/watch it.  I would also not have focused on plot entirely; many novels (or movies) are highly enjoyable just because of their formal qualities and the presentation of the protagonist’s psyche. Characters don’t always have to be dynamic to be complex either; Hedda Gabler being a great example. You could say that Holden Caulfield is judgmental and whiny, but his motivation for it could be because of his alienation from society, his brother’s suicide, his lack of a functional family, and his observation of adults being obsessed with money and education and pleasing the society instead of choosing their own paths and keep their innocence (an observation quite similar to that of The Little Prince actually). If I were you, I wouldn’t also have complained about what type of character is, but rather on how well he is written, which I definitely believe he is.  He also has a development in the form of trying to be “The Catcher in the Rye”, which is a metaphor for a teenager trying to prevent children from “falling down” from the “mountain/cliff” in the “rye field” that represents childhood and innocence. Holden Caulfield also attempts several times to lose his virginity and develop a relationship, but is unable to because of how women were mostly seen as sexual objects at that time rather than actual human beings. He also clearly has a soft spot for his sister, and there is one point where he has a headache and feels drunk because of all of his stress and inner conflicts. He also ends up at a mental hospital, so he is clearly not the same person in the end that he was while he was still in high school.   It’s okay that it’s not your favorite novel, but from a critical and technical point of view, I would say the novel is very well-written. 
    2
  2. Would definitely make my list
    2
  3. Why? Because you don't understand it?
    1
  4. You didn’t understand it enough
    1
  5. I guess you've never felt rebellious or alienated, or had teenage angst, or never felt that people just follow the masses and what the society tells them to instead of being yourself. Oh well, I guess you're one of those people Holden Caulfield would loathe
    1
  6. There is character development and depth if you just shake off your bias. Before I go on however, I must ask; how many times have you read it and when?
    1
  7. Ok, I give up. Your assessment is awful. At least some other people I've come across that dislike the novel are not biased and respect that other people enjoy it
    1
  8. And when was being likable a criteria for being a good character? Characters written by Brecht for example are not meant to be sympathized with at all. And like I said, many novels, movies, or dramatic text try to not have a plot at all because they try to focus on the formal qualities of their specific mediums instead
    1
  9. I stand by my word; your assessment is biased
    1
  10. I'm at least able to come up with a better analysis and assessment than "The book is horrible because it's horrible because it's horrible"
    1
  11. Wll G​​ All of that is a bunch of statements, not reasons
    1
  12. Wll G​ Let's just look at them as if it was a dialogue between two people: A: It has no plot B: How does it have no plot? A: It's written in a style that's practically an unintelligible mess B: What makes it unintelligible? A: It has a wildly unlikable protagonist B: How is he unlikable?  Unless somebody actually knows about the novel, they would not have any idea what you are talking about since it can apply to any novel
    1
  13. Wll G Still too many statements and too little argumentation from you, and you're just as whiny and unlikable as he is.
    1
  14. I ignore your arguments because they're either not reasonable enough or are irrelevant, and I don't take people seriously when they come off as whiny and biased like "This book is so fucking awful", "It's just some random kid whining all the time", and "It's nothing but a terribly written mess" Here's a lot better written assessment from Finlo Rohrer that was also negative: "Many of these readers are disappointed that the novel fails to meet the expectations generated by the mystique it is shrouded in. J.D. Salinger has done his part to enchance this mystique. That is to say, he has done nothing". See? A negative reception, but he remains neutral and analytic, unlike you who are being emotional
    1
  15. I demand neutrality and argumentation, no matter if the assessment is negative or positive. Neutrality is what makes a good critic
    1
  16. It's considered an epic poem
    1
  17. Maybe epic poems are an own category/genre?
    1
  18. Yes, it's an amazing novel
    1
  19. +Scab Inc While it doesn’t have that much of a plot in regards of action, it's meant to be an illustration and representation of teenage angst and rebellion during that time period. Some stories can be very interesting just by focusing on human condition and psyche, you know; it doesn't always have to be interesting and intense because of the action Let's just say that Holden Caulfield is a teenager who shows disdain for people around him because he cannot relate to them, and he feels alienated because he simply cannot live up to the expectations of the society when it comes to things like education, work, and adult life in general. I also think he calls everybody "phonies" because they simply follow the masses and do what the society tells them to instead of being themselves, while the "rye" is a metaphor of childhood innocence and simplicity, and him "catching" the children is a metaphor of him saving them from going over to the adult life. It may sound like some emo or Peter Pan-like story, but I guess adults and older teenagers often miss the times when the world was simple and innocent, and people didn’t have to worry about the future that much. It's okay if you don't like the story, but I think it's interesting to have a rebellious teenager as a protagonist. I also think it's the formal qualities of the novel and the representation of this teenage angst and rebellion I mentioned earlier that have made the novel so acclaimed
    1
  20. +Mario Henriquez "The Catcher in the Rye" doesn't have one
    1
  21. If you think "The Catcher in the Rye" is terrible, you know nothing about literature
    1
  22. +ElWenciooobosss At least write Dostoyevsky (or Dostojevskij) correctly
    1
  23. +Hidden Eagle1 I doubt that you have read all the novels
    1